Murrill v. Warden, London Correctional Institution
Plaintiff: Mickey Murrill
Defendant: Warden, London Correctional Institution
Case Number: 1:2021cv00592
Filed: September 17, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Presiding Judge: Karen L Litkovitz
Referring Judge: Matthew W McFarland
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 17, 2021 Filing 2 Filing Fee Received: $ 5.00, receipt number 100CIN042737 (kl)
September 17, 2021 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Mickey Murrill. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum, #2 Receipt, #3 Envelope) (kl)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Murrill v. Warden, London Correctional Institution
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mickey Murrill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Warden, London Correctional Institution
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?